Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

41753My views Re: politics

Expand Messages
  • Trinidad Cruz
    Jul 2, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      As a matter of fact, I have a credibility stake in 9/11 elsewhere, the
      nature of which I will never inform you or anyone else at this list.
      Suffice it to say that I will not discuss this matter again, and my
      public opinion on it will never change. You'll have that. I'm done
      with this subject here. Believe anything you want. How's the weather
      there?

      Trinidad

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Albert Dolley" <al_d@...> wrote:
      >
      > Trinidad,
      >
      > Has it ever occurred to you that when the truth is plain to see;
      that this is in-fact your objection to it and the single reason for
      your non-belief thereof ?
      >
      > Albert.
      >
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: Trinidad Cruz
      > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Monday, July 02, 2007 4:37 PM
      > Subject: [existlist] My views Re: politics
      >
      >
      > I am not arguing whether or not the WTC towers collapsed as a result
      > of an airliner crashing into them a hundred or so floors up. They did
      > not. They were imploded with explosives. I don't care to argue the
      > point by disassembling the Purdue study though it has many problematic
      > suggestions. I happen to be certain I'm correct, and I have yet to see
      > any decent enough fact finding to dissuade me from my opinion. What I
      > have encountered is an endless trail of obfuscation on the that side
      > of the coin. The issue is as dead as the victims for me. I'm sorry I
      > ever brought it up here again, but I stated my position clearly at the
      > outset in response to someone else's, for what it's worth. I will
      > NEVER think otherwise. And for your convenience I will never bring it
      > up here again.
      >
      > Since we are engaged in this with some animosity now, I will say that
      > believing that groups of people within a government cannot come to a
      > consensus to operate clandestinely especially when large amounts of
      > money are involved is one of the stupidest beliefs I have ever
      > encountered. Sure some activity comes to light, AFTER THE FACT. Taking
      > any comfort in this is putting one's head in the sand, not working for
      > reform and accountability. I will not change my mind about this
      > either, as I have too many children to embrace such a convenient
      > disengagement. But for your convenience I will never bring it up here
      > again.
      >
      > Terrorism here is a matter best handled as an intelligence problem and
      > dealt with by law enforcement. Adventurist military engagement can
      > only fuel its fire, and in fact substantially impede meaningful
      > intelligence gathering. Real enemies must be embraced the closest of
      > all. Our relationship with the Muslim world should probably be best
      > handled abroad as a new cold war. Domestically it is absolutely a
      > matter of law. We have an opportunity with this situation that we
      > never had with the Soviets - an opportunity to substantially delay the
      > proliferation of WMD's to the Muslim world. This is not something that
      > can be accomplished by military posturing. If we constantly ruin this
      > opportunity with military adventurism we can only insure a much more
      > costly conflict. We cannot conquer the world, or even little Iraq by
      > military force. We can blow it up. That's all. The cost of that could
      > well be the end of us all. I will not give you the convenience of not
      > bringing this up again.
      >
      > We need stronger self-defense laws in this country. Women and children
      > should not be allowed to be publicly beaten. Men of conscience should
      > be allowed to intervene with reasonable force and not face criminal
      > proceedings and/or civil litigation. Muslim demonstrations must adhere
      > to non-violence, and law enforcement authority should handle all
      > incidences of violence with arrest, prosecution, and yes deadly force
      > when necessary. But that goes for any other kind of demonstration as
      > well. Violent demonstration is against the law, but not non-violent.
      > Public officials must allow non-violent demonstrations, regardless of
      > subject matter, and not hide behind things like community standard and
      > red-tape permit issues. We must reaffirm an openness to non-violence,
      > and yet meet incidences of violence reliably with appropriate force.
      > This is a matter of legal clarity, something we often sorely lack
      > here. Until we find a new respect for the value of our laws and
      > present a clear and reliable public face, confusion and violence will
      > continue.
      >
      > We are well on our way to spending enough money on this war; that we
      > could have given every single driver in this country a 50mpg Honda car
      > for nothing. At what point is absurdity criminal?
      >
      > Trinidad
      >
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "C. S. Wyatt" <existlist1@> wrote:
      > >
      > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Trinidad Cruz" <TriniCruz@>
      wrote:
      > > > I don't really think you think all the things you wrote here. I'm
      > > > guessing you wanted me to argue what I think in more detail.
      > >
      > > I do not write what I do not believe or have not considered. I do
      > not engage in rhetorical
      > > "exercises" -- if I have a doubt or question, it is posed as such.
      > Games annoy me enough
      > > that I usually break all relations / connections to people without
      > the honesty to ask
      > > questions or pose challenges without trying to bait me.
      > >
      > > My work experiences and friends have brought me close enough to
      > people in power that
      > > I've formed my views based on how things work behind closed doors.
      > >
      > > My comments about the government not doing anything in secret for
      > any extended time
      > > holds. Alternative media and even basic leaks reveal a lot of
      > things. From experiments on
      > > soldiers to "secret" presidential orders, the information is out
      > there. People knew the
      > > "Mafia" was briefly employed to attack Castro, for example. The
      > "Project for a New
      > > American Century" is not secret, either. If people care to read, it
      > is amazing what we can
      > > find. Mention PNAC and watch eyes glaze, though. People would rather
      > watch Paris Hilton
      > > on Larry King.
      > >
      > > As for knowing / understanding NASCAR and Blue Collar America --
      > that's my family. I
      > > grew up going to races in Bakersfield and country music was the only
      > thing my father's
      > > family knows. They are "blue dog" Democrats: union members, but
      > socially conservative.
      > >
      > > I am from the rather extreme end of poverty, which is what shaped
      > most of my views as I
      > > first encountered a university and "educated" people. Blah.
      > >
      > > Susan is a mechanical engineer, so we have followed the research on
      > the Twin Towers, as
      > > well as the pseudo-academics blinded by politics and cynicism. The
      > research from Purdue
      > > University released this month concluded two years of recreations.
      > The professors involved
      > > are not likely to embrace anything said by this government, but
      > their computer models
      > > showed time and time again the weight of the top fourth to third of
      > a building would
      > > cause an implosion. The planes did not strike the tops of the
      > towers, which is the key.
      > >
      > > People will believe what they want, though. For centuries people
      > will debate what was
      > > known and when. Just as they do with Pearl Harbor and FDR. I know
      > people certain that
      > > FDR wanted as many Americans killed as possible to get us into a
      war.
      > >
      > > I'm just not much for conspiracy.
      > >
      > > I really do believe one or two people can set things into motion
      > that are beyond
      > > comprehension. I don't think Hitler needed anyone else to guide him.
      > No one propped up
      > > Stalin. I even think Lee Harvey O acted alone!! I'm just strange
      > enough to believe in both
      > > the power and evil of lone individuals.
      > >
      > > One nut. One "belief" (sane or not) and anything is possible.
      > >
      > > - CSW
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      >
      >
      > No virus found in this incoming message.
      > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
      > Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.9.14/883 - Release Date:
      7/1/2007 12:19 PM
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • Show all 24 messages in this topic